Background: Burma unrestWhat sparked the violence in June?The rape and murder of a young Buddhist woman in Rakhine in May set off a chain of deadly religious clashes. Why was a state of emergency declared?A state of emergency allows the introduction of martial law, which means the military can take over administrative control of the region.Who are the Rohingyas? The United Nations describes Rohingya as a persecuted religious and linguistic minority from western Burma. The Burmese government, on the other hand, says they are relatively recent migrants from the Indian sub-continent. Neighbouring Bangladesh already hosts several hundred thousand refugees from Burma and says it cannot take any more.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-20093143

---The trouble is that you think you have time------Worry is the Interest, paid in advance, on a debt you may never owe------It's not what happens to you in life that is important ~ it's what you do with it ---

"Burma's president has admitted an unprecedented wave of ethnic violence has targeted his country's Rohingya Muslim population, destroying whole villages and large parts of towns.

Thein Sein's acknowledgement follows the release of satellite images showing the severe scale of the destruction in one coastal town, where most – if not all – of the Muslim population appears to have been displaced and their homes destroyed."

Seeing a very ugly side to elements of Myanmar society. Daw Suu Kyi's silence on the issue (not a peep from her in the press this week on the matter - she wants to be the President in 2015, after all, and needs popular support) is deafening. When matters flared up back in June I was made aware of some particularly shocking sentiments exposed locally and online.

as an israeli i know very well how things can be distorted - for instance i believe that if israel would have oil everybody would support us ( most people dont know lots of israelis were on the land - lots of the muslims who live here are more immigrants then the jews here - dont know how they spread propoganda see "paliwood" ect...)

all i am saying is that when i see some fight going in another country than i should check a million times before picking a side - its hard to see the full picture even if you live in that country and even harder to understand what is happening from afar

Please send merit to my dog named Mika who has passed away - thanks in advance

The situation in Myanmar is a lot more complicated than is portrayed in the Western media. The raison d'etre of the Burmese military is mainly to thwart secessionist minorities and they will come down very heavily on any minority that attempts to rebel, regardless of their religion. So the Rohingya attempt to carve an independent Islamic state out of Arakan in western Burma is guaranteed to produce a violent response on the part of the military. Imagine if a group of Mexican illegal immigrants tried to claim half of New Mexico in the US, or a group of asylum seekers laid claim to Cornwall in the UK, how do you think our governments would respond? In addition the Rohingya are mostly uneducated, medieval in their views, and fanatical in their interpretation of Islam, which puts them at loggerheads with the native Rakhine people. Let's not forget that it was the gang rape and murder of a young Rakhine girl that began all this trouble. The Rakhine people unfortunately responded with violence, then the entire Rohingya community went on a rampage destroying property and murdering people, while all the while claiming to be the victims. Around the world other medieval Muslims threatened the Burmese, with terrorists in Pakistan threatening to plant bombs and idle rich Saudis sending tens of millions of dollars to train Rohingya people in terrorism. You cannot be a troublemaker and a victim at the same time.

Raksha wrote:The situation in Myanmar is a lot more complicated than is portrayed in the Western media. The raison d'etre of the Burmese military is mainly to thwart secessionist minorities and they will come down very heavily on any minority that attempts to rebel, regardless of their religion. So the Rohingya attempt to carve an independent Islamic state out of Arakan in western Burma is guaranteed to produce a violent response on the part of the military. Imagine if a group of Mexican illegal immigrants tried to claim half of New Mexico in the US, or a group of asylum seekers laid claim to Cornwall in the UK, how do you think our governments would respond? In addition the Rohingya are mostly uneducated, medieval in their views, and fanatical in their interpretation of Islam, which puts them at loggerheads with the native Rakhine people. Let's not forget that it was the gang rape and murder of a young Rakhine girl that began all this trouble. The Rakhine people unfortunately responded with violence, then the entire Rohingya community went on a rampage destroying property and murdering people, while all the while claiming to be the victims. Around the world other medieval Muslims threatened the Burmese, with terrorists in Pakistan threatening to plant bombs and idle rich Saudis sending tens of millions of dollars to train Rohingya people in terrorism. You cannot be a troublemaker and a victim at the same time.

You talk about how westerners are not understanding the situation, and yet all of your statements include the same reasoning that is reported solely in the Burmese media. This persecution has going on for much longer than this year, the country has been denying them citizenship and access to things like education and basic human rights for decades. Their illiteracy is not through their own doing. You can spin it however you like, but this still falls under the category of genocide. Here is a slightly sensational video that at the very least shows that this is not just the military trying to maintain order. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLlh2WpTqj0

It's interesting to note how ordinary people use simple words to speak of parties involved: "Rakhine", etc., while the journalists add a whole lot of labels like "Burmese Buddhists", "Rohingya Muslims", "intolerance", "discrimination", etc.

The labels often obstruct seeing the actual intention behind the acts - for example, was something done out of self-defence or out of hate, greed and delusion.

If someone would help to resolve this conflict, these would be the people able to remove the labels and explore the actual feelings, thoughts, values and intentions of the parties involved - like Marshall Rosenberg does with his Non-Violent Communication.

I'm glad there's at least one wise person able to work toward reconciliation.

Aung San Suu Kyi recently told Indian Broadcaster NTV: "Violence is something I condemn completely, but don't forget that violence has been committed by both sides. This is why I prefer not to take sides and also I want to work towards reconciliation between these two communities. I'm not going to be able to do that if I'm going to take sides."

Suu Kyi elaborated further, saying: "There's a quarrel whether people are true citizens under the law or whether they have come over as migrants later from Bangladesh. One of the very interesting and rather disturbing facts of this whole problem is that most people seem to think as that there was only one country involved in this border issue. But there are two countries. There's Bangladesh one side, there's Burma on the other and the security of the border is surely the responsibility of both countries."